Political Flavors


Contradictions made by people insulting my husband (AKA, Misogynist Troll Insult Fails Part 2)

Posted in Editorials on July 17th, 2014
by
Tags:

Christian Red Pill blogger Dalrock published a hit piece on a woman journalist, and decided that instead of relying only on his incisive wit and literary talent, he’d also link to her personal photos and Flickr account. Because he wanted to ruin more than just a mediocre DS9 episode.

Ms Brink took to twitter asking people for help in reporting this post as abusive, and Adam sent out a tweet encouraging people to do so. And in case it’s not clear, I support anyone’s right to write or say whatever they want about whoever they want without fear of the government. But saying “Hey it’s not cool to link to naked pictures of a woman your are slut shaming” is not censorship. It’s exercising those same free speech rights to tell you that you are an asshole. Which you have every right to be.

But a simple, “This is not cool and it might violate Word Press Terms of Service” tweet has invoked the rage of the manosphere. And Oracle of Delphi, is it hilarious! They know they hate women, and they hate men who don’t hate women, but they can’t figure out why. And their reasons are delightfully contradictory.

Adam is:

“White Knight and all-purpose Mangina”
a “cowardly white knight” “spreading lies”
one of the “rabbit people”
“mangina Adam Lee (again, the only person who even has given Mizz Brink the time of day) thinks he can authorize ‘social sanctions’, even though it is safe to say that just about all the men here have had far more lifetime success with women than Adam Lee has.”

But also:

A ‘male feminist’ is almost always a sleazy predator in disguise. Hugo Schwyzer proved this. Being a ‘male feminist’ really is the perfect cover for such a predator.

So he’s a cowardly sexless mangina but also a sleazy sexual predator? Got it.

And:

Adam Lee is just another sub-human degenerate Social Justice Warrior who thinks that anyone who disagrees with him need to be shut down. These sons of bitches are just like Hitler’s Brownshirts with less testicular fortitude to face you in person.

But:

I could not help noticing from Adam Lee’s Twitter that…he appears to be a Jew

A JEWISH NAZI! OMG.

They’re also really obsessed with Adam having sex with and/or being sexually rejected by Brink:

If Adam Lee does his job right, he might just get lucky tonight!

I should also point out that Adamangina Lee is thinking to himself :

“This superslut had sex with 8 men while still legally married……I am the only one who rushed to her aid……….Yet she is STILL turning me down?? Whyyyyyyyyyy????”

Ms Brink,

Adam is only doing this because he hopes that maybe you will have sex with him.

Adam,

She is NOT going to have sex with you. Ever. You are quiche eating beta male. She is using you to try and tear down people who make her feel bad because she is a terrible person speading terrible advice. Stop what you are doing. You’re never going to get laid.

As creepy as these comments are, I don’t think “quiche eating beta male” will leave my vocabulary any time soon. It’s perfect for ironic joke insults. Thanks dudes.

I spent my morning train ride laughing my head off at these comments, and trying to pick my favorite insult. I actually made my own from this word salad – “Hitler rabbit.” As in “Adam thinks men shouldn’t call women bitches. What a Hitler rabbit!”

49 Responses to “Contradictions made by people insulting my husband (AKA, Misogynist Troll Insult Fails Part 2)”

  1. Anna McHugh Says:

    As an official RP lurker, I appreciate the laughs. People who condense RP-manosphere nonsense are always good in my book. Thanks for making my morning! Off to ask the bf to make some rabbit quiche for dinner!

  2. willard Says:

    The unbearable stench of manuresphere. Of the Christian kind, no less.

    Those Christians make feminazis look saintly.

  3. innocentbystander Says:

    Elizabeth,

    Thank you for quoting my comments from Dalrock’s site. That was actually flattering. You DO understand that your beloved husband was defending a woman who openly stated that she thinks its okay to date (and even have sex with) other men while still (currently) married to her husband. Dalrock called Rebecca out on that. THAT is what Adam “defended” a behavior that Rebecca should be ashamed of.

    I hope you do NOT share Rebecca’s (or your husband’s) opinion on this matter. I hope you value marriage just a little bit more than that.

  4. Anon2 Says:

    Elizabeth,

    Shouldn’t you be worried that your husband is going out of his way to gain the approval of a woman better looking/thinner than you, who has a reputation for committing adultery?

    Remember, Adam said it is ok for a woman to have sex with multiple men while still married, so he has sanctioned your pursuit of this activity, lest you need to even the score with him.

    I detest the Dalrock trolls too, but I don’t want your life to get turned upside down because you didn’t see what others saw coming, since you are just an innocent bystander here. Godspeed, and good luck, Elizabeth.

  5. Anon2 Says:

    Elizabeth,

    Please delete my comment(s) after you read them. I don’t want the misogynists to get more fuel from misconstruing that.

    But don’t think that it is a good thing to have your husband interacting with the likes of Rebecca Brink. She is what, in the old days, we would call a ‘homewrecker’. The enemy of your enemy is NOT your friend in this instance. She is a bigger danger to you than some anonymous ‘Dalrock’ and his ilk.

  6. Elizabeth Says:

    Unlike you, I don’t hate women, and I have a pretty high opinion of men. So your bullshit divide and conquer strategy is not going to work here.

    This has nothing to do with Ms Brink’s personal life, or my marriage. This is about Dalrock being a hateful bully and linking Brink’s personal Flickr for you to angrily masturbate to, and then insisting he has the moral high ground.

    So please don’t insult my intelligence with more concern trolling. Try to be more like that Great Books For Men guy. He’s at least entertaining.

  7. Mike Haubrich Says:

    Elizabeth –

    Thanks for not deleting Anon2′s comments. As illustrative as Dalrock’s on the persistence of misogyny.

  8. Elizabeth Says:

    Oh wow, must have been a glitch with the refresh. I just noticed Anon2′s request for deletion. Sorry, request denied. I need to keep this in case anyone needs a good example of what concern trolling looks like.

    You don’t want “misogynists” getting more fuel from the fire? Who do you think you are? A guardian angel? Are you kidding?

    Fuck off, I’m not afraid of other women. That shit is for RPWs and teenage girls.

  9. KendraSK08 Says:

    While it might not have been his original intent, it seems that now during the fallout of all this, Dalrock’s piece is inadvertently creating a google problem for her which is sad. His blog shows up as one of the first results for her name. Being familiar with the mindset of some of his commenters, they are probably feeling real giddy about it and don’t mind this at all.

  10. willard Says:

    I second Mike’s thanks, Elizabeth.

    This particular concern troll is one of the dimmer bulbs at Dalrocks’ — and that’s saying something.

  11. willard Says:

    KendraSK08 Says:

    “His blog shows up as one of the first results for her name.”

    Not on Google.

  12. Thomas Puckett Says:

    Awesome quotes, Elizabeth! I’m glad to see you and Adam can laugh off the idiots. My thanks to you both for speaking out.

    Strangely, I’m now feeling hungry for a quiche…

  13. =8)-DX Says:

    The doubly hillarious thing is that “quiche-eating” isn’t an insult in most people’s vocabulary. I guess they would however be enraged at being called “sausage swallowers” or somesuch manly man name.

  14. Elizabeth Says:

    Thomas – They are super mad. It’s kind of shocking how easily they are provoked. “Lol, no such thing as a Jewish Nazi!!” And immediately they fly into ranting about how ugly I am. And they say feminists are the thinned skinned ones! Imagine if I was making a more substantive argument than “ha ha you’re ridiculous.”

  15. innocentbystander Says:

    Elizabeth,

    We are not super mad at you. And there are only two people who were easily “provoked” (Rebecca, by trying to get wordpress to dump Dalrock and your husband, who white-knightingly jumped to twitter to defend the honor of an adulterous slut.) Those are the only people who were provoked.

    I’m not trying to get your blog shut down the way some of you feminist cowards are with Dalrock, I wouldn’t do that. I just don’t care. But you (and Adam) picked the wrong side here. Don’t defend/champion Rebecca just because you and her share the same gender. It does a disservice to everything that you might trying to accomplish with your writing. You lose the moral high ground that you might have had being happily married.

  16. innocentbystander Says:

    One more thing Elizabeth, the manosphere is your friend. Yes it is. We (generally) support women who get (and most importantly STAY) married to their husbands. That is good. That is right. If you can’t get this, you do not understand the manosphere.

    You really picked the wrong side here. Please don’t support Rebecca. Please tell Adam to stop his twitter crusade against Dalrock. Dalrock is a very good man doing a very good thing for men with his Christian blog. Adam is doing a terrible thing for supporting Rebecca.

    And I’ll go one further, I take back what I said about Adam being a quiche eating beta male. And I’m being sincere.

  17. Elizabeth Says:

    Look, dude. I don’t know you and it’s clear you don’t know me very well. I care deeply about justice. And I know a bully when I see one. Dalrock is a hateful, spiteful bully. Please don’t tell me to believe the opposite of what I know to be true. It’s disrespectful and it makes you look foolish.

    WordPress has terms of service, just like every other web hosting company on the internet. I do not know if Dalrock has violated those terms, but if he did, the rules should apply to him as they would to anyone else. That’s not censorship, that’s fairness.

    You lose the moral high ground that you might have had being happily married.

    Being married, or happily married does NOT make me more moral than any other human being, and I strongly object to any insinuation otherwise. Morality comes from how you treat others, not your marital status.

    One more thing Elizabeth, the manosphere is your friend. Yes it is.

    You must have some TERRIBLE friends. Please get help.

    I have lots of friends and I love them dearly. They have NEVER EVER, NOT ONCE concern trolled me about how my husband was going to cheat on me with some lady he met on twitter a few days ago because they think she’s more attractive than me. My friends have have also NEVER EVER, NOT EVEN ONCE posted on the internet about how fat and ugly I am.

    I don’t care to pal around with people who write misogynistic screeds about other women’s bodies they way your ilk are doing right now about Rebecca. I don’t like bullies. They are scum.

    So what I’m saying is I would never, ever be friends with anyone who would comment on Dalrock’s bog.

    You really picked the wrong side here.

    No I didn’t. I will always up for defending people who get picked on by cretans like you.

    And furthermore, like I said originally, this divide and conquer tactic is crap and won’t work on any feminist worth a damn. What you are doing is so transparent as to be laughable. You’re telling me I’m a good girl and Rebecca is a slut. FUCK THAT. I reject your bullshit false dichotomy with everything in my heart and mind.

    And I’ll go one further, I take back what I said about Adam being a quiche eating beta male. And I’m being sincere.

    I don’t care. It’s a juvenile insult. It’s funny to laugh at. The point is not that you made a puerile joke. It’s that you think it’s fun to pile on and bully people. That’s a vile impulse. And I hope you try to figure out where that’s coming from.

  18. innocentbystander Says:

    Elizabeth,

    Given what you just wrote to me (thank you for that response), I’m not convinced you even understand what Rebecca has done.

    All Dalrock did was link to things that Rebecca posted publically and make a point on his blog. He didn’t troll hers. And I certainly hope that you don’t think I’m trolling yours….

    …and I have never seen your picture. And even if I had, I would not call you fat or ugly.

  19. Elizabeth Says:

    She dated people during her divorce and you are calling it “adultery.” If one spouse serves the other with divorce papers, it’s not cheating to go out with someone else before the papers are final. Divorce can take years. Why should people be lonely and celibate because paperwork gets tied up? Context matters here.

    I don’t care that she posted those pictures publicly. Dalrock linked them on his post out of spite. Because he is a bully.

    Think about the company you keep, dude.

  20. innocentbystander Says:

    Elizabeth,

    >>>She dated people during her divorce and you are calling it “adultery.”

    No Elizabeth.

    She had SEX with men she was dating while she was still married to her husband (before she was divorced.) That IS adultery. You didn’t know what she did, apparently.

    The reason why I am in the manosphere (the company that I keep) is because I firmly believe that divorce should essentially never happen. I married my wife for life. For life! My marriage is more important than my friends, my job, even my parents. My wife and I are “one flesh.” Feminism (something you believe in) created Marriage 2.0 (where you have no-fault-divorce and unilateral divorce.) To me THESE ARE IMMORAL. They destroy the marriage “contract” and take what was “until death us do part” to “until I am no longer happy.” You add in cash and prizes (alimony, child support, the house, etc) and you take something that was good (the best) and made it evil. Feminism has done this.

    Rebecca probably can’t understand why Dalrock made a point of HER point. That is because she doesn’t see anything wrong in what she has done or is doing. She left her husband because he ceased making her happy. Her own personal happiness is MORE IMPORTANT than her marriage. She has DESTROYED her husband. You understand that? Can’t you understand that?

    Your marriage to Adam should be sacred and pure. Think about how awful you would feel if your husband did to you what Rebecca has done (and is doing) to her ex? The manosphere (the company I keep, your words) has correctly identified the problem. Rebecca is just pissed off about it because no one has ever called her out (publically) for the horrible person that she is.

    Not only should Dalrock do this (even if you think he is being a bully) but SO SHOULD YOU. He is ANGRY about people destroying marriages this way and YOU SHOULD BE ALSO.

  21. Elizabeth Says:

    Think about how awful you would feel if your husband did to you what Rebecca has done (and is doing) to her ex?

    If I gave Adam divorce papers, I wouldn’t care if he had sex with someone else. That’s what divorce is.

  22. innocentbystander Says:

    >>>>If I gave Adam divorce papers, I wouldn’t care if he had sex with someone else. That’s what divorce is.

    That is correct. You wouldn’t care if he had sex with someone else because YOU gave HIM divorce papers. But he might be DEVASTATED that you not only gave him divorce papers but that you went and had sex with someone else. That is what marriage is.

    That is why I am in the manosphere.

  23. Shockna Says:

    They destroy the marriage “contract” and take what was “until death us do part” to “until I am no longer happy.”

    The latter sounds far preferable to me. I’ve never understood why anyone would ever enter a lifelong commitment like that assuming that they’ll never change and a currently good relationship will always remain so. It sounds to me like the height of madness to legally enshrine such contracts without making them “at-will” (i.e. no fault divorce easily available).

    Some of us want the economic benefits of marriage without all of the religious nonsense you ascribe to it. Legal marriage shouldn’t be a civil mirror of your religious marriage, doctrines and all.

  24. willard Says:

    IBB, did Dalrock send you? Too bad. You hardly make sense over at his place, and are even less coherent here.

    Do you realize how pathetic your concern trolling is? No, of course you don’t. But you’ll get brownie points over at D for being useful, just once.

    Why doesn’t Dalrock himself show up to tell Elizabeth and Adam all those things he so cowar… um, bravely writes about them on his blog? Is he so stuck up that he sends his least convincing minion to do his dirty job for him?

    He and his sycophants are all very busy congratulating themselves on being such brave Christians, fighting this unjust persecution (no, I’m not making this up — they really believe that), but somehow their “leader” does not have the guts to come forth and act like a man by directly discussing the matter with those whom he continues to slander in his posts and comments.

    I guess they don’t make those Christian men like they used to. Pity.

  25. innocentbystander Says:

    Shockna,

    >>>>>The latter sounds far preferable to me. I’ve never understood why anyone would ever enter a lifelong commitment like that assuming that they’ll never change and a currently good relationship will always remain so. It sounds to me like the height of madness to legally enshrine such contracts without making them “at-will” (i.e. no fault divorce easily available).<<<<<

    It is not so much the divorce that is wrong (although that is also true) it is the CASH AND PRIZES which makes the divorce evil. If you want to leave your husband because you are not happy anymore, then LEAVE. You leave with the clothes on your back, no house, no kids with you, no child support, no alimony, NO NOTHING. You are not happy and you want to leave, you get ZERO. That is the way is used to be and (lo and behold) we had so few divorces. And people learned to live together for lifetime (even if they didn't always love each other.)

    Alas that is NOT the way man's law works because feminists (like you) vote. Shockna, the cash and prizes award for no-fault and unilateral divorce (unilateral = you want a divorce, he doesn't, too bad you win and you get his money) has DESTROYED marriage. That is the reason why so few young men bother to better themselves. Why should they? Just do enough to get by, do everything you can to avoid paying taxes, and never marry. Ever. Because…. SHE'LL TAKE IT ALL because people (like you Shockna) think it is perfectly okay for the marriage contract to be "at will."

    I've got news for you. Marriage is NOT supposed to be about YOUR HAPPINESS. Marriage is NOT supposed to be about CHANGING YOUR MIND. Marriage means a lifetime together (even if you can't stand him from day to day.) You CHOSE him. He proposed. You said yes. Then you said "I do." That's it. It's over. The fact that feminists (like you) were able to co-opt the marriage narrative and elect legislators to empower divorce theft creates a natural disincentive for men to marry women….

    …and that is happening NOW. Our whole country is being ruined (financially) from this because if there is no reason for a man to "man up" and if all the men "go their own way" (look up the term MGTOW) then let me ask you Shockna….

    ….whom shall we tax?

  26. innocentbystander Says:

    willard,

    >>>>>IBB, did Dalrock send you?<<<<<

    No he did not. I came over here of my own free will to try and stop this silly, childish, twitter crusade of Adam's because it is immature and unrightous. Dalrock's forum is great. And I am NOT one of his minions, (he and I have disagreed many times before, look it up.) But much of what he writes is good and valuable.

    He calls out evil for what it is. Rest assured Willard, what Rebecca has done to her husband is EVIL. And she should be ASHAMED of herself. Look what she did to her husband? How can you possible defend a monster like that? Would you like you wife to do that to you (give you divorce papers and start sleeping with all sorts of other men?) What kind of a human being does that to the one person in the entire world with whom they are supposed to be "one flesh?"

    The persecution is just. It is NOT that we (in the manosphere) are not without sin. We wish NO HARM to come to you, to Shockna, to Adam, to Elizabeth, or Rebecca. BUT that doesn't mean that Rebecca should not be called out for what she is. If she wants to put herself out there like that (with a blog bragging about living like this) then she needs to have enough INTEGRITY to take the heat that might come for a person of principles (like Dalrock.) That is the way it goes with the world wide web.

    As far as why Dalrock doesn't post here? Well, why don't you post on HIS forum and ask HIM that question. I will not be presumptuous to answer for him.

  27. willard Says:

    IBB, you need to stay teh eff out of other people’s sex lives. It’ll do you good.

    Also, find something useful to do. Your concern trolling is sad. And laughable. But mostly sad.

    P.S. But LOL at D as “a person of principles.” Now that is hilarious.

  28. willard Says:

    Elizabeth, IBB is a particularly verbose and pompous troll with an acute persecution complex, here as well as at his (or her) natural manurespheric habitat.

    You may want to damp his (her) verbose enthusiasm before (ha!) it gets out of hand.

    Just sayin’.

  29. Katie M Says:

    “Marriage means a lifetime together (even if you can’t stand him from day to day.)”

    So when my mother’s second husband was both verbally and physically abusing her, she still should’ve stayed with him? That’s certainly what HE thought-after she kicked him out, he started harassing her on the phone, telling her divorce was a sin.

    No woman needs this crap.

  30. Shockna Says:

    “it is the CASH AND PRIZES which makes the divorce evil. If you want to leave your husband because you are not happy anymore, then LEAVE. You leave with the clothes on your back, no house, no kids with you, no child support, no alimony, NO NOTHING.”

    Then get a prenup. This is ignoring the fact that divorce isn’t PURE MONEY LIVE LIKE A QUEEN FOREVER CAPSLOCK!!!!!1!!1!! like you seem to think it is.

    “That is the way is used to be and (lo and behold) we had so few divorces. And people learned to live together for lifetime (even if they didn’t always love each other.)”

    Not to mention all the people trapped in abusive situations. And even if that weren’t the case (and yes, it was; the 50s society people like Dalrock seem to idolize was horrifyingly accepting of domestic violence), the idea of having your ability to live outside poverty shackled to lifelong misery ought to be terrifying to all civilized people.

    “unilateral = you want a divorce, he doesn’t, too bad you win and you get his money”

    Prenup.

    “That is the reason why so few young men bother to better themselves. Why should they? Just do enough to get by, do everything you can to avoid paying taxes, and never marry. ”

    Horseshit. I’m part of that demographic (young men), and I know that’s just plain wrong.

    “I’ve got news for you. Marriage is NOT supposed to be about YOUR HAPPINESS. Marriage is NOT supposed to be about CHANGING YOUR MIND. Marriage means a lifetime together (even if you can’t stand him from day to day.)”

    For you, perhaps. The nice thing about institutions and contracts is that they’re not perfectly rigid, and can be changed.

    “Our whole country is being ruined (financially) from this”

    Oh, now that’s rich. I’ve heard some pretty idiotic explanations of the current financial crisis from libertarian extremists, but this one has to take the cake.

    “if all the men “go their own way” (look up the term MGTOW)”

    MGTOW and Going Galt weren’t actually the same thing, last I checked. Both are similarly pathetic, but they’re hardly the same.

    “What kind of a human being does that to the one person in the entire world with whom they are supposed to be ‘one flesh?’”

    Newsflash: Not everyone agrees with you on what marriage should be. I certainly plan on marrying, but I find the entire “one flesh” notion to be disturbing beyond belief.

    “We wish NO HARM to come to you”

    I’ve read enough of the manosphere to know that isn’t true. Well, perhaps no harm to me (except, of course, for those MRAs with a desire to punish those perceived to be “manginas”), but certainly harm to women. Unless, of course, you’re willing to completely condemn Vox Day and other manosphere types who are against women’s suffrage, education, and all around social/legal equality to men?

  31. guest Says:

    “the 50s society people like Dalrock seem to idolize was horrifyingly accepting of domestic violence”

    Dalrock commentariat often waxes nostalgic about those good ol’ days when husbands were able to put wives in their place without pesky law interfering.

    They are often very upfront about “what women need:”

    “You have to handle women with a firm hand. That means if they get out of line, you drag them back, kicking and screaming if need be. That will work to keep them attracted. Women respond to strength, but you need not be cruel. Do not bounce her head off a wall when a slap will bring her to her senses.”

    http://www.donotlink.com/pb1

    While I have not seen D directly promote domestic violence, he lets his regulars do it. He’s clever that way, letting his minions do his dirty work and retaining plausible deniability for himself. It is SOP on his blog.

  32. feministhater Says:

    Unlike IBB, I do hate feminists. I don’t care whether you listen or not, I don’t care if you get raped, assaulted, killed, dumped on the road side and run over by a truck. So, listen up!

    Rebecca is good pump and dump fodder for all the “bad boys”. Those tats are like a call sign to them! She does need to post more pictures revealing her tats while hiding her cellulite. That was a good call Rebecca, she should also hide her face, it’s a huge turn off.

    Rebecca is a slut, that’s exactly what she is, nothing more, nothing less. Slut, slutty slut, slut! And a whore. I’m sure she’s trying to coerce Adam, right now, into being the next rider, breaking her in for like the millionth time.

    Anyway, as marriage means so little to Elizabeth, divorce will soon follow and that’s no shame.

  33. guest Says:

    This comment from feministhater is a great example of what Dalrock&Co. represent.

    Don’t remove it, Elizabeth, since it serves as a reminder of what Dalrock&Co. promote: the unvarnished and violent hatred of women by damaged and deranged men, rooted in their own sexual frustrations and jealousy.

    That’s all there is to it, as evidenced above (and over at Dalrock, and in every corner of manuresphere every day).

  34. feministhater Says:

    “..the unvarnished and violent hatred of women by damaged and deranged men, rooted in their own sexual frustrations and jealousy.”

    Well, no, I am indifferent to whether feminists get hurt or killed. I have no feelings towards hurting them one way or another. I thoroughly detest them, yes, but that reveals itself not in violence but by leaving them to their own demise.

    Women can be wonderful, they can be caring, helpful, nurturing and kind. They can be loving and a blessing.

    A feminist, however, can be none of those. A waste of a human being if ever there was on. I hate feminists.

  35. willard Says:

    By all means, Dalrockians, come over here y’all and show us your hatred of women in its full glory, along with its rationalizations (“I only hate feminists, I luuuve women, the submissive ones that is, who give sex and sammiches on demand”) and passive or active threats of violence.

    C’mon, show us all what you’ve got. Don’t hold back.

    Mind you, it’s not as though we don’t know; but spreading your abusive behavior beyond the confines of your safe echo chamber helps us better document it (and make the case to wordpress).

  36. feministhater Says:

    “By all means, Dalrockians, come over here y’all and show us your hatred of women in its full glory, along with its rationalizations (“I only hate feminists, I luuuve women, the submissive ones that is, who give sex and sammiches on demand”) and passive or active threats of violence.”

    Why should one be forced to love femdykes? I hate you and your feminist sisters as much as you hate Christians who believe in a natural hierarchical order within marriage.

    I have the honesty to own my hatred of you. You have no honesty or honour at all. Any disagreement or outright refusal to accept your “lifestyles” or ideology is “hateful” or “abusive”.

    I do love submissive women who submit to one man, her husband and honour him, rather than feminists or the government. You’re damn right about that.

  37. feministhater Says:

    The only case you can make to “WordPress” is one of censorship, for none of the accusations Mssss Brink makes are true. She posted everything online, in full view of the public. A public show of her lurid acts are on full display for anyone to remark upon. Y’all think about that for awhile…

  38. willard Says:

    Awesome.

    Now tell us again what you’d like to do to those femdykes. Be specific.

  39. feministhater Says:

    Willard, do tell.. what would you like to do to those femdykes!?

    You seem to have a hard on for feminists..

  40. willard Says:

    Protect them from the likes of you.

    But, c’mon, don’t change the subject. Keep talking. And bragging on Dalrock about your super-slayer powers here.

    While at it, invite others, those who only cowardly spew their vitriol over there, to come and share their views about women with us. Don’t hold back. We want to hear it all.

  41. feministhater Says:

    Ohh, Mr White Knight. It’s views on a post feminist world, meaning on feminism and often, feminist women, which has hijacked all meaningful relations, including marriage, between men and women.

    What ‘super slayer’ powers, all we’ve done is write something you disagree with and you cannot allow that to happen, so you need something to shut us down. You’re the one constantly changing subject, you’re literally trying to get someone to say something you very well know they don’t mean. Are you an agent for the SPLC? Do you get paid by the comment to spew feminist bull?

    At least we come here to challenge you directly, you couldn’t handle stopping at Dalrock’s blog to challenge him without resorting to censorship. You’re “ideologues”! Anything that doesn’t agree with your freakshow lifesyles must be abolished.

  42. guest Says:

    Willard, it is unfair to yank a rabid dog’s chain. One can see its sickness without provocation.

    And I don’t think anyone really needs to worry about protecting women from these individuals IRL. Their own personalities, to the extent one can apply this term to their deranged characters, make women run away fast enough.

    The manuresphere is populated by nothing but the dim and emotionally disturbed, and thus perennially socially rejected, individuals like the one above, who use their time (of which they have too much, what with no real lives of their own), to rationalize their life failures and blame them of the evil women in general and feminists in particular.

    Their misery and hatred it generates are nothing new, nor especially interesting. One should not waste much time on them. Let them wallow in manuresphere, where they belong.

  43. Highwasp Says:

    Good question IBB: who’s gonna get taxed? ~ well it’s obvious to me the only ones left to tax after Western Civilization [as created by the Evil-Male-Patriarchy] is destroyed, then the empowered feminine who tossed aside men and children for career and carousel will be paying taxes ~ that’s who.

    Along with her will be her minions of White-Knight-Beta-Mangina supporters – oh and the Oppressed/Immigrants – just as soon as they are able ~ or allowed ~ all those who were ‘Oppressed’ and all their supporters will be paying taxes. They won’t be oppressed anymore once the Evil Male Patriarchy is defeated. Then they can pay taxes to whatever New World Order comes after Western Civilization is gone.

    Experience is an effective teacher – as is observation – with each successive feeding (frivolous or no-fault divorce) a parasite leaves behind new converts or corpses. Look and learn how to avoid the parasite… Don’t Get Married! Don’t have kids! Don’t make yourself a target of the parasite by creating a surplus of wealth. Go Your Own Way. Call it Karma or adaptation – or simply the natural demise of parasitic greed – one learns to survive.

    Hypergamy and the Feminine Imperative, [look it up] encouraged and rewarded by the ‘powers that be’ have created a parasite intended to destroy the host civilization wherein it lives. Benefitting the few at the expense of the many – same – same…

    However, that which cannot be sustained, won’t.

    So – What’s next? Women, Manginas and the Oppressed, fully empowered and privileged, paying taxes to the civilization of their Master’s making. Well OK – I’ll go my own way and observe as the host civilization is killed and the parasites then feed off each other, surviving them to be around for the next rebuilding.

  44. Guest Says:

    Honestly, if it weren’t for the manosphere commenters on here, there wouldn’t be any comments. That’s just how out-of-touch feminists are.

    I’m what you might call fairly neutral in this debate, since I’m not a fan of the vast majority of the so-called “manosphere”. But it’s blindingly obvious that the era of sluts, whores and feminism is over.

    It’s amusing how confident and cocky you social engineers remain, when considering the facts. The Western world, which is the only region in the world to fully embrace feminism, sluts and whores is about to die off demographically. I love my culture, so this is very sad. But it’s a fact. I think you rather “slow” types are probably not bothered by that fact alone, because you hate the traditional West even more than you hate men. But when it dies, it will simply be replaced by other people who aren’t degenerates. So you’re pretty much in a no-win situation. You’re pathetic “lookatme” tantrum lasted exactly one generation. I hope it was worth all the feels….

  45. Elizabeth Says:

    For a bunch of guys who respect marriage so much you really seem to want mine to fail. Like, you are shipping Adam and Rebecca harder than a teenage girl writing Harry Potter fan fiction.

  46. Anon2 Says:

    For a bunch of guys who respect marriage so much you really seem to want mine to fail.

    Not really. We want yours to succeed, by acting *before* it is too late. You arrogantly dismiss that concern as being a ‘concern troll’.

    Your problem is that YOU want it to fail, and thus see everything as confirmation bias.

  47. gdgm+ Says:

    Elizabeth and colleagues,
    It’s time for you to pause for a bit. The amount of snark and squid ink you’re putting out in response to those disagreeing with you about the Brink matter, is trying to cover the 2 basic issues of the ‘controversy’:

    1. Ms Brink wrote on “The Frisky” about the fellows who ‘dated’ her and then decided not to: “because I was “still married,” I was doing something morally wrong — essentially, cheating on my husband.”

    2. Whether or not one agrees or disagrees with Mrs. Brink’s perspective, she then had someone (i.e. Adam Lee) try to *silence* a blogger reading from Ms Brink’s public writings and then raising a separate discussion.

    Be advised that *more than one* blogger has commented on “l’affaire Brink”. Another blogger (‘pancakeloach’) explained it this way:

    quote:

    “… a woman who blogs at The Frisky decided to write about her love life while she was divorcing her husband and sleeping around, and Dalrock, a blogger who examines the cultural mores surrounding sex and marriage, used her public story as an example of the current cultural mores surrounding sex. If you read [Dalrock's link], you’ll see that the point of the post is not about Rebecca personally: she’s just a particular example of a larger behavior pattern.

    Of course, if you post on the internet about how you feel bad because a couple of guys refused to date you before your divorce paperwork is finalized, it’s a good bet that somebody, somewhere, is going to call you a slut. That would be because their definition of “slut” includes women who sleep around on their husbands before they finalize their divorces. …

    … News flash, children: not everyone in the world is obliged to validate your life choices. In fact, no matter what life choices you make, _someone is going to think you made the wrong decision_! An adult would carefully consider whether or not the people criticizing you have a point, and whether or not you care. If you put yourself “out there” and insist upon talking about “hot topics” like, say, sex, religion, or politics, you’re going to catch some flak. … Real life is not _your_ personal playpen and the universe does not revolve around _you_.”

    end quote.

    Like it or not, divorce and bad behaviors *do* have public implications and costs beyond an individual couple. Families are divided, monies are reallocated, friends / observers can decide to then divorce from _their_ relationships (or never marry in the first place, which can also have negative impacts on any children they have — or would someday like to have). The attitudes which lead to failed relationships, cause problems for men AND women, far more nuanced than “men = bad, women = good, *no matter what*.” And a nation and world of failed relationships, leads to many many more problems, as other commenters in this thread are noting.

    And *censorship* in trying to discuss these problems, as Mr Lee was trying to enforce by getting a blog taken down, is very, very wrong. It should also be noted that readers of these blogs aren’t just in the US, but in Canada, Latin America, Europe, Africa and Asia. The world can see Mr Lee’s poor and unethical behavior in this matter.

    So, you can fizzle and spit, but your anger is deeply distorting your vision here. ‘willard’ in particular is frothing at the mouth here, and would benefit from some balance (or perhaps better meds).

  48. Shockna Says:

    “Don’t Get Married! Don’t have kids! Don’t make yourself a target of the parasite by creating a surplus of wealth.”

    You’d think the first two would prevent those EEEEEEEVIL feminists from draining your wealth. Well, unless of course you’re a general misanthrope in addition to a misogynist, and you think that helping the downtrodden in any way (e.g. social safety nets) is immoral too.

    Good thing most men aren’t willing to completely end their personal ambitions just for the sake of spiting feminists. If you’re thinking about “going your own way”, just go, and get the hell out of civilized society; you have no place here.

  49. Anon2 Says:

    Shockna,

    er…. Dalrock and Christians like him have a lot of kids. It is leftists like Adam and Elizabeth who have no kids.

    Aren’t you leftists worried about how conservatives are out-breeding you?

    You certainly are not smarter than a monkey, so don’t pretend you are.

Leave a Reply